Bombay High Court
Shantabai Bhagwat Shejwal Since Decd. ... vs Ratna Machindra Kharat And Ors on 20 January, 2025
Author: A. S. Chandurkar
Bench: A. S. Chandurkar
2025:BHC-AS:3380-DB
Digitally
signed by
ANANT 33.WP.10853.2023-J.doc
ANANT KRISHNA
KRISHNA NAIK
NAIK Date:
2025.01.24
11:10:44
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
+0530
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10853 OF 2023
1. Shantabai Bhagwat Shejwal )
(Since Deceased through her Legal Heirs) )
1a. Mr. Madhukar Bhagwat Shejwal )
Age:67 Years, Occupation:Retired )
R/O: No.93, Near Gram Panchyat, )
Lasalgoan, Tal:Niphad, Dist: Nashik )
1b. Ms. Asha Bhagwat Shejwal )
Age:66 Years, Occupation:Household )
R/o.: 93 No, Near Gram Panchayat, )
Lasalgoan, Tal: Niphad, Dist: Nashik )
1c. Mrs. Usha Jayprakash Nikale )
Age: 64 Years, Occupation: Retired )
R/O: Flat No.1, Om Shraddha CHS, )
Rameshwadi, Samarth Nagar, )
Badlapur (W), District: Thane )
1d. Mrs. Nirmala Ashok Jadhav )
Age : 60 Years, Occupation: Housewife, )
R/o: Flat no.03, Om Sai Plaza, Rameshwadi, )
Samarth Nagar, Badlapur (W), District: Thane )
1e. Manda Daulat Pagare )
(Since Deceased Through her Legal Heirs) )
el. Mr. Rahul Daulat Pagare )
Age: 33 Years, Occupation : Driver )
e2. Kranti Daulat Pagare )
Age:25 Years, Occupation: Housewife )
2. Late. Parvatabai Shankar Kedare )
(Since Deceased through her Legal Heirs) )
akn 1
::: Uploaded on - 24/01/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 25/01/2025 08:38:49 :::
33.WP.10853.2023-J.doc
2a. Mr. Ashok Shankar Kedare )
2b. Mr. Vishwas Shankar Kedare )
2c. Mr. Bhagirat Shankar Kedare )
2d. Mrs. Shila Uday Dangare )
(Since Deceased through Legal Heirs) )
2ci. Mrs. Sharda Bhagirat Kedare )
2cii. Mrs. Rupali Srinivas Bhatula )
2a, 2b, 2ci, 2cii R/o:Collector Patta, )
Sangameshwar, Malegaon, Tal. Malegoan, )
Dist : Nashik )
2d. Jagdish Shankar Kedare )
(Since Deceased Through his Legal Heirs) )
2di. Mrs. Shalini Jagdish Kedare )
2dii. Mrs. Usha Jagdish Kedare )
2diii. Mr. Vishal Jagdish Kedare )
2div. Mr. Sumit Jagdish Kedare )
2dv. Ms. Dhuvika Hemant Jadhav )
2dvi. Ms. Smita Rakesh Nikam )
2dvii. Ms. Swapnali Rahul Masukar )
2e. Sharad Shankar Kedare )
(Since Deceased Through his Legal Heirs) )
2ei. Mr. Sagar Sharad Kedare )
2eii. Ms. Savita Sharad Kedare )
akn 2
::: Uploaded on - 24/01/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 25/01/2025 08:38:49 :::
33.WP.10853.2023-J.doc
2di to 2dvii, 2ei, 2eii all R/O:502, )
Rajendra Park, Shakti Nagar, )
Dahisar (E), Mumbai- 400070 ) ..Petitioners
Versus
1. Mrs. Ratna Machindra Kharat )
Age: 47 Years, Occ: Agriculturist )
R/O: Ghaari(Hinganvedhe), )
Taluka: Kopargaon, District: Ahmednagar )
2. The Divisional Commissioner )
Nashik Division Nashik. )
3. The Additional Collector, Malegaon )
District Nashik. )
4. The Sub Divisional Officer, Chandwad, )
District Nashik. )
5. The Tahasildar Chandwad )
Taluka Chandwad, District Nashik. )
6. The Circle Officer, Chandwad )
Taluka Chandwad, District Nashik. )
7. The State of Maharashtra )
(To be served through AGP office )
Bombay High Court, Fort, Mumbai ) ...Respondents
****
Mr. Rameshwar Gite, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. Atharva Dandekar i/b. Mr. Hitendra Parab, Advocates for the Respondent
No. 1
Mr. P. G. Sawant, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 2 to 7.
****
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR &
M. M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATED : 20th JANUARY 2025
akn 3
::: Uploaded on - 24/01/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 25/01/2025 08:38:49 :::
33.WP.10853.2023-J.doc
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per A. S. CHANDURKAR, J):
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard the learned
Counsel for the parties.
2. The subject matter of dispute are lands admeasuring 55.33R from Gat
No. 473 and 35.66R from Gat No. 481/2 located at Vaki Budruk, Taluka-
Chandwad.
3. Initially, the Respondent No. 1 being aggrieved by the Mutation Entry
undertaken in respect of the said lands, filed an appeal under Section 247 of
the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short "the Code") before the
Sub-Divisional Officer. The said appeal came to be allowed on 15/12/2018
and Mutation Entry No. 1279 taken on the basis of an unregistered will
came be certified. The Petitioners being aggrieved by the aforesaid order
approached the Additional Collector, who by his order dated 26/08/2019
partly allowed in the same. He set aside the order dated 15/12/2018 passed
by the Sub-Division Officer in so far as Mutation Entry No. 1279 was
concerned. With regard to breach of terms and conditions, directions to pay
the amount of penalty came to be issued.
4. The Respondent No. 1 thereafter preferred a Revision Application
before the Additional Commissioner under Section 257 of the Code. On
05/10/2020, the Additional Commissioner passed an order permitting the
withdrawal of the said proceedings in view of the pursis given by the
Respondent No. 1 on 16/09/2020. The Respondent No. 1 was under the
belief that having paid the amount of penalty, Mutation Entry No. 1279 was
liable to be restored. For this purpose, the Respondent No. 1 moved an
application before to the Hon'ble Minister of Revenue vide communication
dated 17/12/2022. An endorsement thereon was made by the Hon'ble
33.WP.10853.2023-J.doc
Minister calling upon the Additional Collector to submit a report after
examining the factual position.
5. The Petitioners, being aggrieved by the initiation of such steps have
filed this Writ Petition principally on the ground that, as Mutation Entry No.
1279 was set aside by the Additional Collector on 26/08/2019, steps could
not have been taken to restore the same as long as the said order continued
to operate.
6. In the aforesaid background, we have heard the learned Counsel for
the Petitioners as well as the learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1.
7. It is not in dispute that after the Additional Collector partly allowed
the appeal preferred by the Petitioners and set aside Mutation Entry No.
1279. The said order continues to hold the field. The Revision Application
preferred by the Respondent No. 1 challenging that order was withdrawn on
05/10/2020. It appears that the Respondent No. 1 was under the belief that
having paid the amount of penalty, the Mutation Entry was able to be
restored. In our view, unless the order passed by the Additional Collector on
26/08/2019 is set aside, Mutation Entry No. 1279 cannot be revived. For
this reason, the steps taken pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble
Minister on the application moved by the Respondent No. 1 on 17/12/2022
are misconceived. Such steps could have been taken only if the order passed
by the Additional Collector on 26/08/2019 was set aside.
8. In that view of the matter, we are satisfied that a case for interference
has been made out under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, especially
as steps for restoration of Mutation Entry No. 1279 are being undertaken
without the order dated 26/08/2019 passed by the Additional Collector
33.WP.10853.2023-J.doc
being set aside.
9. In this backdrop, the following order is passed:
(a) The steps sought to be taken by the Revenue Authorities
pursuant to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Minister on the
application moved by the Respondent No. 1 dated 17/12/2022 shall
not be carried out any further.
(b) It is open for the Respondent No. 1 to seek revival of the
Revision Application preferred by her for challenging the order dated
26/08/2019 passed by the Additional Collector, if so advised. If such
steps are taken, the same shall be considered in accordance with law,
subject to the hearing the present Petitioners.
(c) Needless to observe that as long as the order dated 26/08/2019
passed by the Additional Collector operates, Mutation Entry No. 1279,
which stands cancelled, cannot be restored.
(d) The Writ Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
10. Rule is made absolute with no order as to the costs.
(M. M. SATHAYE, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J)
